Jones v Kernott – WLR Daily

“When a cohabiting couple bought a family home in their joint names and were both responsible for the mortgage, but without any express declaration as to their beneficial interests, the starting point was that equity followed the law so that the presumption was that they were joint tenants both in law and in equity. That presumption could be displaced by showing that the parties had a different common intention at the time when they acquired the home or that they later formed a common intention that their respective shares would change. Their common intention was to be deduced objectively from their conduct. If it was clear that the parties did not intend joint tenancy at the outset or had changed their original intention, but it was not possible to ascertain, whether by direct evidence or by inference, what their actual intention was as to the shares in which they owned the property, each was entitled to that share which the court considered fair, having regard to the whole course of the dealing between them in relation to the property.”

Sign up for the daily email

“So many sources, so little time…THE leading resource for keeping lawyers on top of the legal news, commentary and authorities, Current Awareness from the expert Inner Temple librarians, is indispensable. “